today, which I tried (apparently unsuccessfully) to cancel. For
anyone who happened to get that message, this is the intended full
message.]
In looking into the children of Conan I of Brittany, I have found the
documentation to be routine for the most part, but there are still a
couple of loose ends which are worth mentioning. The list given in ES
2:75 [Geoffrey, Hawise, Judicael count of Porhoet d. 1037, and
"Hurnod"] is both unsatisfactory and incomplete. Anselme 3:45-6 gives
a more complete list:
legitimate:
Geoffrey I
Juhael, first count of Porhoët
Judicael, d. 1037, bishop of Vannes
Catualon, abbot of Redon
Urvod
Judith m. Richard II of Normandy
[Note that ES is evidently identifying the second and third of these.]
illegitimate:
Alain, died in battle with his father
Judicael, called Glanderius
2 sons (names not given), killed at Angers
Another list of Conan's children appears on page 145 of M. Paul de la
Bigne Villeneuve, Cartulaire de l'Abbaye de Saint-Georges de Rennes,
Bulletin et Mémoires de la Société Archéologique du Département
d'Ille-et-Vilaine 9 (1875), 127-312 [available at Gallica], where they
are listed as Geoffrey, Juhaël, Judicaël, Judith, Catwallon,
Hurwodius, Alain, and two unnamed others, i.e., all except Judicaël
Glanderius, but it is clear from page 148 that he regarded Juhaël and
Judicaël GLanderius to be the same person. Geoffrey and Judith are
documented by numerous sources, and bishop Judicaël, Catwallon, and
Hurwodius are well documented by the cartularies [e.g., the Cartulary
of Redon, available at the Gallica site]. The existence of Alain and
the two unnamed sons is verified by the account of the battle at
Angers in the history of the counts (or "consuls") of Anjou [see "Ex
Gestis Consulum Andegavenium" in RHF 10:255], leaving the following
undocumented loose ends:
1. Anselme's claim that Alain and his two brothers were illegitimate.
2. Alain's death in battle with his father.
3. The existence and relationship of Juhaël (if different from 4).
4. The relationship of Judicaél Glanderius.
I discuss the first three briefly and the fourth in some detail.
1. Alain, captured and released at Angers with an unnamed brother (who
might be one of Conan's other known sons), is referred to by the
history of the counts of Anjou as "Alanus primogenitus Conani" (see
RHF 10:255), which seems to indicate that he was the recognized
successor of his father (and thus probably legitimate), and I cannot
find the indication that he (or his two brothers killed at Angers)
were illegitimate, as Anselme suggests.
2. Although he certainly survived the battle at Angers (chronology
uncertain to me, but a few years before Conan's death), I have not
found the source that Alain died along with his father.
3. Both Anselme and Villeneuve give du Paz (no title or page number)
as their source for Juhaël, alleged count of Porhoët. I have checked
Augustin du Paz "Histoire généalogique de plusieurs maisons illustres
de Bretagne : avec l'histoire chronologique des évêques de tous les
diocéses de Bretagne" (Paris 1619, available on microfilm at the FHL),
but without finding anything. (Porhoët does not even appear in the
index.) I am inclined to regard the claim with suspicion.
4. Villeneuve, on page 148, gives the following quote, citing "(Chron.
de Gaël, apud D. Morice, Pr. I, 358.)" for Judicaël Glanderius:
Anno ab incarnatione Domini M. VIII ..... excedente Gaufrido comite
Britanniæ a sæculo, filii ejus Alanus et Eudo cum matre eorum
Haldevisia, quorumdam suorum perfidia, multa perpessi sunt incommoda.
Ex quorum execrando collegio Glanderius Judichael Cham filius extitit,
qui se cum suis in stricto castro conferens ineptam guerram inde
contra ipsos facere disposuerat. Sed ejus machinamenta injusta, Dei
providentia, non multo post, facta sunt irrita. Nam quantocius ab
Alano et Eudone fratre ejus cum valida manu militum obsessus, castrum
in quo se contulerat, sine mora captum fuit, et ipse peremptus pœnam
mortis subiit
My translation (corrections welcome): "In the year of the incarnation
of the Lord 1008 ..... [After] Geoffrey, count of Brittany departed
from life, his sons Alan and Eudes, with their mother Hawise, by the
treachery of certain [men] of their own, endured much trouble. Out of
their accursed association, "Glanderius Judichael Cham filius" stood
out, who, gathering with his men in a cut-off ("stricto") castle,
arranged for an inept war to be waged against them from there. But by
the providence of God, his unjust plots were made ineffective not much
later. For, as soon as the castle in which he had gathered was
besieged by a poweful band of soldiers, he was captured without delay,
and being himself destroyed, he suffered the death penalty."
The obvious problem is that there is no clear genetive in the words
"Glanderius Judichael Cham filius" which would help us interpret those
words. Remembering the likelihood that the author submitted his
(nineteenth century) article in handwritten form, a possible
misreading of minims by the printer to give "Cham" instead of "Chani"
seems to be the best way to emend some kind of genetive out of this,
giving "Glanderius Judicaël son of Chanus". However, even if this
emendation is correct and "Chanus" is interpreted as some form of the
name Conan, I see no clear reason to identify the father of
"Glanderius" with Geoffrey's father Conan. [FHL film number 441502
appears to be the volume from which Villeneuve took the above quote.
I have ordered this film at my local Family History Center, which I
should have in two or three weeks, but it is also possible that a
generous resident of Salt Lake City might speed things up by checking
the film to see if my suggested emendation is correct.
As always, comments on the above loose ends are welcome.
Stewart Baldwin